Okay so yes I and many others can see how self-care oozes with neoliberal values, but I certainly don’t want the opposite and then claim that it’s revolutionary in some way or another. A lack of self care doesn’t make you a rebel, this isn’t the Salt March, no one gives a shit if you eat nothing but Doritos for a year. I think what you have to do is to take the bait but not the hook, ie you should take care of yourself by eating kale and running and going outside more and all that good stuff without ever believing that just doing those things solves the health issues where you live. We have to get properly postmodern about health. If things don’t have pure essences, then kale and yoga aren’t inherently “ideological” to use Zizek’s language.
I mean hell, health is a class issue that poor people should definitely get behind. We need to take back health and fitness from personal responsibility. Jesus Christ there is nothing wrong with eating more vegetables and going to the gym. Self-care is only bourgeois because the bourgeois have the time to afford it.
I’m not sure about these claims that “capitalism wants this” or “ideology wants that”. I can see pretty clearly that yoga and meditation and mindfulness teach people to treat themselves before treating the world, and it’s become a bit of an upper class thing to go to yoga and be seen in your activewear, and you want people admiring your gains so I can see how it maintains the functioning of capitalism. But bodegas and food deserts also serve capitalism in an opposite direction. Dependency on your corner store makes you a return customer, and there’s a lot of money to be made in an apathetic people who are letting people swindle them out of their health. Who wins, the capitalists promoting health, or the capitalists promoting ill health? I’m struggling with this language of capitalism “wanting” things. Honestly just sounds like a lefty reification of The Market.